I have noticed that this is a fandom-specific concern. I have seen published studies where the writer did not obtain permission to quote from blogs, stories, or open posts
I was told recently (by someone I'd never spoken to before) that lurkers culd quote just fine w/out permission, but since I am in fandom, I have to meet a higher standard; while I agree, in principle, with that (i.e. as a member of the community, I have a higher responsibility to the community than someone outside), I was then told that I should realize that my even asking for permission to talk about a story was an incredibly hostile "academizing" act that was probably traumatic to the person (turned out not to be true, when I finally managed to connect to the person who'd been busy in RL and not checking email). But at that point, I disengaged because I figured no matter what I did, I was damned (and that person is also an academic).
So there is NO agreement on any of these issues.
The IRB issue is more complex than you present it here: a *lot* depends on the makeup of the specific IRB and the specific campus. I hope more and more the Boards realize that different disciplinary standards apply, and that one cannot apply a cookie-cutter approach. Outside of working with certain populations (prisoners, pregnant women, minors) as the "study group," and outside of certain types of studies (clearly medical and psychological are the most relevant), the submission to IRB is not that onerous (everywhere). My own campus IRB is very good at being aware of diffrent standars for, say, oral history and journalistic types of research, and while I have some some questionnaires, that research never came until full IRB review.
Of course, academic committees are academic committees, and there can be power mad idiots anywhere (even in fandom). The old IRB chair here did not used to allow ANY ethnographic research at all, only quantitative, even in social sciences. People cheered when he left campus.
It seems odd to be so mistrustful of people who have so very, very much to lose, merely by dint of having a RL name attached.
Academics as a class/group do have a lot of social status and privilege, and I understand it's hard to people outside that culture to see the hierarchies within. But you're right here--and it's unfortunate that at least one critic of OTW is determined on linking one of the OTW members to her real life academic persona, something I'd always thought was frowned upon in this wonderful fandom culture we are all a part of (except for us academics, apparently).
A wonderful post--you know a lot about academia without being heavily invested in the scholarship/publish or perish parts of it all.
no subject
I was told recently (by someone I'd never spoken to before) that lurkers culd quote just fine w/out permission, but since I am in fandom, I have to meet a higher standard; while I agree, in principle, with that (i.e. as a member of the community, I have a higher responsibility to the community than someone outside), I was then told that I should realize that my even asking for permission to talk about a story was an incredibly hostile "academizing" act that was probably traumatic to the person (turned out not to be true, when I finally managed to connect to the person who'd been busy in RL and not checking email). But at that point, I disengaged because I figured no matter what I did, I was damned (and that person is also an academic).
So there is NO agreement on any of these issues.
The IRB issue is more complex than you present it here: a *lot* depends on the makeup of the specific IRB and the specific campus. I hope more and more the Boards realize that different disciplinary standards apply, and that one cannot apply a cookie-cutter approach. Outside of working with certain populations (prisoners, pregnant women, minors) as the "study group," and outside of certain types of studies (clearly medical and psychological are the most relevant), the submission to IRB is not that onerous (everywhere). My own campus IRB is very good at being aware of diffrent standars for, say, oral history and journalistic types of research, and while I have some some questionnaires, that research never came until full IRB review.
Of course, academic committees are academic committees, and there can be power mad idiots anywhere (even in fandom). The old IRB chair here did not used to allow ANY ethnographic research at all, only quantitative, even in social sciences. People cheered when he left campus.
It seems odd to be so mistrustful of people who have so very, very much to lose, merely by dint of having a RL name attached.
Academics as a class/group do have a lot of social status and privilege, and I understand it's hard to people outside that culture to see the hierarchies within. But you're right here--and it's unfortunate that at least one critic of OTW is determined on linking one of the OTW members to her real life academic persona, something I'd always thought was frowned upon in this wonderful fandom culture we are all a part of (except for us academics, apparently).
A wonderful post--you know a lot about academia without being heavily invested in the scholarship/publish or perish parts of it all.